Aryan95614/aerograph-asrs huggingface dataset:
Aircraft: SMALL AIRCRAFT; LOW WING; 1 ENG; FIXED GEAR
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Aircraft X was IFR; level 120; and eastbound.Aircraft X reported Aircraft Y; four hundred feet above; opposite direction; crossing directly above. It was not confirmed; but the pilot believes the Aircraft Y climbed to avoid Aircraft X at the last minute; thus passing above by 400 feet. Aircraft Y was VFR and not talking to any HLN controllers. Aircraft Y later checked on with LC after the conflict was over. There was no time for evasive action by Aircraft X or control instructions from Approach in-between the report of Aircraft Y and the two aircraft passing.HLN is entirely non-radar. Approach cannot and does not see any VFR aircraft; and can only pass traffic if VFR pilots identify themselves. In this case; Aircraft Y did not check on with approach so no traffic was given.Both pieces of traffic were at 120; so they would have been on ZLC's radar and both had ADS-B. HLN does not have access to either of these. If HLN did have access to either one; approach could have called traffic in a timely manner and could have climbed or descended Aircraft X accordingly.HLN needs some form of surveillance; whether it is an ADS-B feed; or a display of already existing radar coverage. HLN Tower Controller reported a NMAC between two opposite direction aircraft.
Aircraft: DHC8
Phase of flight: Climb
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

All operations prior to climb were normal. ATC assigned an altitude of 11;000 feet. 11;000 feet was set in the altitude selector. The autopilot was engaged in the following modes: LNAV; ALT SEL and in pitch (pitch attitude was set at 5 degrees nose up). These parameters were verified and confirmed. As the aircraft approached 11;000 feet the aircraft pitched up to more than 10 degrees nose high and did not capture the 11;000 foot assigned altitude. Both the FO and myself noticed this happen at the same time and also noticed 8000 fpm where 'pitch' was indicated prior. I immediately disconnected the autopilot and began a descent back to 11;000 feet. The highest altitude we saw on the altimeter was 11;400 feet. I directed the FO to contact ATC and inform them what happened. ATC acknowledged and proceeded as normal. We continued that flight and reengaged the autopilot with no other abnormal operations. [Report narrative contained no additional information]. Dash 8-200 flight crew reported an altitude overshoot resulted when the autopilot pitched up for unknown reasons.
Aircraft: CITATION EXCEL (C560XL)
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical

We were en route to X51 and checked in with Miami Center. Center gave us a re-route that included the SSCOT1 RNAV arrival into X51. The problem is that there are no arrivals into X51. There are no arrivals in the FMS or the EFB for this airport. To access the SSCOT1 arrival in the FMS we would have to change the destination airport to TMB. To view the SSCOT1 arrival on the EFB we would have to select TMB. When I told the Controller that we were unable to fly that arrival and that there were no arrivals into X51 he said that his computer showed that to be incorrect. The Controller then assigned us fixes to fly. The next two Center frequencies also tried to assign us arrivals into X51. The FMS and approach plates do not match what ATC sees in their computers. A Citation 560XL flight crew was rerouted via the SSCOT1 RNAV STAR for their arrival into X51 (Homestead General Aviation) but discovered the arrival was in neither their FMS database or their EFB for use into their destination and so advised ATC. Miami Center believed that to be incorrect but provided fix by fix clearances allowing the flight to continue to X51.
Aircraft: BEECHCRAFT TWIN PISTON UNDIFFERENTIATED OR OTHER MODEL
Phase of flight: Landing
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

ATIS information; wind 080 at 7 altimeter 30.15. [I] was given instruction to turn left from northwest heading to intercept final approach for 17 left. Next [given] change to 17 right; contact tower on 123.75. [I] was cleared to land 17 right. [I] was on short final when the next instruction from tower (Go around right side; aircraft on runway) (Extend up wind). The aircraft on runway began take off as [I] was a beam the threshold on right. As [I] was climbing on right side single engine Cessna gained altitude very quickly and began to drift into [my] flight path. [I] turned right and climbed above pattern altitude to avoid collision with Cessna while trying to keep Cessna in view on left side. The tower restated the (instruction that [I] was to extend up wind) [I] then resumed course 17 at tower's instruction. The Cessna could not see the [my aircraft] on the right and above the wing. [I] was then instructed by the tower to turn right for downwind 17 right get back down to pattern altitude 6800 feet and get back on the east traffic pattern restriction. [I] was again given a clearance to land 17 right. Again [I] was on short final when [I] was given instruction to go around right side aircraft on runway extend up wind. [I] was then instructed to turn right for downwind 17 right. Again given clearance to land 17 right. Again on short final [I] could see an aircraft stopped on runway. [I] contacted the tower and asked if this was going to work. [I]was instructed to continue approach for a landing. [I] had already initiated a go around; when the tower gave instruction to go around right side air craft on runway. [I] went around and given instruction right turn for downwind 17 right. [I] was instructed to contact tower on 118.9. [I] was given clearance to land 17 left. [I] landed on 17 left without incident. In my option the operation of dissimilar aircraft in such tight spacing could have been a contributing factor in the near miss. The setting sun may have restricted the view of the tower to the west; not able to see the aircraft on runway to the west. Trying to make a tight turn after side stepping right for a go around doesn't allow enough room for maneuvering. [The highway] converges with the south end of 17 right narrowing that airspace considerably. With a cross wind out of the east the steep bank required to make a right turn; when aircraft are in a climbing turning slow in a steep bank should not be expected to stay east of [the highway]. Twin engine Beechcraft pilot reported an NMAC in the pattern at APA.
Aircraft: A319
Phase of flight: Final Approach
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

The autopilot was on and Captain flying. Following a heavy on the same runway. The Captain called for flaps 3 and I put flaps to 3 position. Shortly after that the plane seemed to hit turbulence and quickly exceeded flap speed. The Captain turned off the autopilot and corrected the situation. We landed without further issues and notified Maintenance for inspection. A319 First Officer reported a speed deviation occurred on approach to EWR when they encountered either wake turbulence or ordinary turbulence.
Aircraft: AIRBUS INDUSTRIE UNDIFFERENTIATED OR OTHER MODEL
Phase of flight: Climb
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

Flight was a test flight after maintenance on the rudder and elevator components. Profile was to fly min of an hour and climb between 290-310Kts where multiple events had occurred. On the climb out at 300Kts ABQ Center did query about this being a test flight. We were cleared [Route X for our] first clearance; we were on heading vectors and the controller asked to reroute us [Route Y]. I was concerned with the reroute and fuel because it was a much longer route. We asked for [Route Z] and the arrival. Controller asked if we could turn within 9 miles. We stated yes thinking she needed the turn to start before 9 miles. We were cleared Gila Bend which was 180 degrees behind us. Direct TUS. As we started the left turn I left it in heading for a steeper bank angle versus NAV. Half way through the turn controller asked us to increase the bank. I kicked off the autopilot and rolled to 35 degrees of bank. We were heading direct to Gila Bend VOR. AQB center told us to call a phone number when we land. We asked why? Response was we were told to turn within 9 miles and we turned in 14? We started the turn on a vector? We called the center and spoke with the manager. He stated we went into restricted area but the military 'called a cease fire' so it was ok. Clear direction from ATC with turn reference with DME from an actual nav aid. Not pilotage 9 miles? During climb out on a Maintenance test flight; ATC gave us a reroute. We determined that the length of the reroute would leave us with too little fuel at landing; so we requested a more direct routing. The controller said they could offer vectors only; due to restricted airspace being active. We elected to take vectors for more direct routing; and then the controller asked if we could make a turn towards GBN VOR and stay withing 9nm of our present position. We said we 'thought' we could and were cleared for a 180 degree turn direct to GBN VOR. during the turn the controller asked us to tighten the turn; so we took the autopilot out of NAV mode; and put it in HDG mode to increase the bank angle. A few moments later the controller gave us a new heading and told us to tighten the turn as much as we could. At that point the autopilot was disconnected and we banked the aircraft up to about 30-35 degrees. We were then cleared direct to GBN VOR again; and told to contact ABQ center upon landing. When we inquired as to 'why'; we were told that we had entered restricted airspace.Initially we thought 9 nm would be enough for a 180 degree turn. Had we known that we were about to penetrate restricted airspace; automation could have been turned off sooner to enable a tighter turn. Airbus flight crew reported entering restricted military airspace after ATC asks if they can make a turn within 9 NM. Crew thinks that means start turn within 9 NM.
Aircraft: B737
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Cleared to line up and hold for Runway XXL; the FO (First Officer) stated I have an amber light. I told him to get the QRH while I tell Tower. Tower cleared us off the active runway and to circle back around and hold short of the runway while we sort through our problem. FO stated we had an ELEC2 hydraulic low pressure light and the procedure is to turn the pump off; end of checklist. Tower told all departing flights that thunderstorms may shutdown south departure flows. Tower asked if we were going to be delayed long. I told the FO I was ready. He asked if I was willing to takeoff and I said yes without realizing I had not gone through the MEL flow chart. After takeoff and clear of the thunderstorms; I noticed the amber Low Pressure light on the overhead panel and realized in my haste to get airborne; I forgot the MEL flow chart process.Three-day trip and I was reassigned on day one. I arrived at hotel at XA:00 and didn't get a good nights sleep; but didn't think I was fatigued. Day two; ground stop to ZZZ; but we were able to land at ZZZ only 30 minutes late. The FAs (Flight Attendants) informed me we had international connections. As soon as gate was open; we taxied to the gate; but agent had difficulty with jet bridge. As the FO and I walked past the gate for [the connecting flight]; we saw our passengers at the gate unable to board as the door was shut 10 minutes before departure. We were both upset we were not able to get them to their connection. This lead to a less than restful night sleep for me thinking what I could have done better. Nevertheless; I was tired on day three but still did not think I was fatigued. Uneventful taxi out for takeoff to ZZZ1. [Weather service] displayed a line of thunderstorms approaching ZZZ. Seven aircraft ahead of us and Tower informed all aircraft they may ground stop south departures. Finally; we had clearance to line up and wait and I felt we were going to make it. Then the Low Pressure light came on. The FO ran the QRH and I thought we were ready. I was so focused on getting airborne before the thunderstorms shut down the departures; I simply forgot about the MEL. I believe being tired and frustrated coupled with my desire to get airborne before the thunderstorms shutdown the airport caused my focus to be misguided.As I write this report; I ask myself how could I have simply forgotten to run the MEL? It just doesn't make sense to me now. But at that exact moment; it seemed so clear. The QRH checklist was called complete and we were good to go. We going to be able to get airborne and get these passengers to ZZZ1 on-time. My lesson learned here is to maintain my focus on procedures. [Report narrative contained no additional information.] B737-800 flight crew reported rushed departure due to impending weather which resulted in a failure to complete MEL checklist.
Aircraft: A319
Phase of flight: Parked
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor

I was a deadheading crew member and pre-boarded the flight with my fellow deadheading crew members. We had just placed our luggage in the overhead bins and we were getting settled into our seats; when all crew members on board (both deadheading and working) noticed a very strong smell of burnt plastic / dirty feet come on. The odor developed rapidly and grew stronger by the second. I developed a headache and became lightheaded. When we realized there appeared to be a fume event; the working crew called for maintenance and we all exited the aircraft and waited for further direction on the jet bridge. At this time my headache worsened; and I continued to feel lightheaded to the point I was having to physically hold my head up with my hand. The First Officer exited the aircraft to do a walk around in attempt to locate the source of the smell; and upon his return he stated that there was a bleed in the aircraft; and that we would not be able to take the plane to our planned destination. At this point; I developed a strong throat irritation and labored breathing. I walked back onto the aircraft to grab my luggage; at which point my mouth started to tingle and went numb. I walked halfway up the jet bridge to get outside to the gate; and fell backwards; briefly unconscious. My crew member was able to catch me and sit me down and again; I passed out. The crew was quick to retrieve oxygen from the aircraft and administered it to me as we waited for paramedics to arrive. I was then taken to the ER for treatment. A319 deadheading Flight Attendant reported strong fumes during pre-boarding resulting in health issues and deplaning of aircraft.
Aircraft: CESSNA 152
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe

As the pilot in command of the aircraft; I had done all the necessary preflight actions. The route of flight was [along the coastline] at 5500 feet. As we were cruising down the coastline; I remember the engine ran a little rough; and I turned on the carburetor heat. We flew for approximately 5 minutes before we started losing engine power. It looked like we were going to lose the engine power completely to me. I turned inland and went through the checklist. The engine still seemed as though it was going to turn off completely. I was gliding towards ZZZ1 airport. With the engine still giving slight power pulses; I remember going through the checklist at least 3 times. It was at about 3500 feet that the engine started giving me the power I needed. I kept the aircraft climbing to 6500 feet. Moments later the engine seemed to run smooth again; and so I decided to take the airplane back to ZZZ; [the departure airport]. I landed the aircraft; and I remember the controller asking me if I needed any assistance of some sort. I did not see the need. I taxied the aircraft back to the flying club; and parked it. I then spoke to the dispatcher and the mechanics regarding what had happened and that I suspected it to be carburetor icing. C152 pilot reported a loss of engine power that resulted in a return to the departure airport. The pilot suspected carburetor icing.
Aircraft: A319
Phase of flight: Climb
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

An A319 was in level flight at FL350 and he requested a climb to FL370. I did not do an adequate traffic search and climbed him. Within one minute; the A319 and Air Carrier Y started flashing. Air Carrier Y was in level flight at FL360. I quickly turned the A319 thirty degrees left for traffic and he complied. I then turned Air Carrier Y thirty degrees left and descended him to FL340 for traffic. Air Carrier Y then asked if he could climb to FL380. I came back on the frequency and told him to turn thirty degrees left and descend immediately. He came back questioning the turn and I told him to just descend and turn now. Luckily the A319 understood the gravity of the situation and picked up his climb rate and when I asked for altitude reports from both aircraft I had five miles and 1;000 FT. Air Carrier Y actions were not good enough. When a control instruction is issued for traffic; it needs to be accomplished and not debated. I was extremely concerned for about 30 seconds that the two aircraft might collide mid-air. I need to do a better traffic scan that is basic ATC. The pilots need to act quicker and accordingly and not drag their feet on these clearances. Enroute Controller described a conflict event at FL350/370; claiming one of the aircraft was slow to respond when given an instruction contributing to the occurrence.
Aircraft: MILITARY TRAINER
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC

I was transiting westbound along the beach line at 500 feet MSL; a ¼ mile south of the coastline and had a very near mid-air collision with a banner-tow aircraft flying opposite direction. Distance between aircraft estimated at less than 100 feet horizontal and approximately 10-20 feet vertical. Banner-tow AC was not spotted by me (rear cockpit/passenger in front of cockpit) until approximately 2 seconds before aircraft passed each other. I turned hard right 90° to verify other aircraft (after passing). I was talking to ATC; had a squawk code and was [on] frequency. Event occurred just south of Pensacola Beach; FL approximately 1 mile west of pier and approximately 2 miles east of NAS Pensacola Class C surface area. I did not receive a traffic advisory radio call and afterwards queried ATC Controller if he had other traffic on radar scope. No definitive answer was given. I believed banner-tow AC was not participating with ATC; i.e. did not have a squawk code; [was not communicating] with ATC; and most likely came through NAS Pensacola (NPA) Class C airspace without clearance. While forward visibility in the plane is problematic [due to the aircraft design and seating configuration;] I believe the banner-tow aircraft was not keeping a sufficient forward look-out (we're guilty too; despite our aircraft's impediments and a properly briefed passenger; etc.) as well. This incident is reported in good faith in hopes of preventing future such incidents. The pilot reported a 'very' near miss with a banner-towing high-wing aircraft in or near NPA Class C airspace while flying the beach at 500 feet. He was receiving advisories but the other aircraft was not; nor did the other aircraft have a Class C clearance.
Aircraft: LEARJET 45
Phase of flight: Landing
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control

I was Captain and pilot flying. I was flying a normal approach (Visual) to Runway 7. After fully configuring the aircraft we continued to land. Upon touching down the main gear I lowered the nose wheel onto the runway; deployed the thrust reverses and applied the main brakes. I felt that I had no pressure pushed on the brakes again and I announced that; 'I have no brakes going to emergency braking; I've lost my steering.' As I gently pulled on the emergency brake handle my co-pilot reengaged the steering and reached over and extended the spoilers manually to ensure they were extended. I stated that emergency braking wasn't working and pulled a little firmer and said that I've still got no steering. The steering was reengaged but I didn't have any directional control at this time. My co-pilot said don't skid and I felt the plane start to go sideways. I kept holding the brake handle until we did come to a complete stop facing the opposite direction. At this point I shut down the plane and contacted Clearance Delivery to let them know that we were on the runway and that Runway 7-25 was closed as we could not move and then I called the owner. After shutting down the engines I could still hear something running; I looked over the panel and deduced that it was the Aux Hyd Pump. I shut this down and secured the aircraft. At this point we exited the aircraft and walked around the aircraft to assess for any damage. I pushed down the spoilers manually at this time. I then discussed with my copilot the approach and landing trying to understand what had just happened. The only conclusion that I had was that I lost my main brakes; my emergency brake wasn't effective and that I didn't have directional control. I have since spoken with the Maintenance Department; management and my co-pilot to figure out what had happened; I have also looked at what I can do differently in this situation to have a better out come. A LR45 normal brake; emergency brakes and steering failed on landing. The steering reengaged but caused a 180 on the runway but came to a complete stop after which ATC was called to close the runway.
Aircraft: A321
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway

During landing roll between 80 and 60 kts tower rattled off taxi instructions ([Taxiways] XX-XY-XZ hold short [Runway] XXC) and I read them back. During the taxi in; while doing my after landing flow; we turned from [Taxiway] XY to [Taxiway] XA; this being the standard taxi route in ZZZ off of [Runway] XXL I didn't think twice until ATC came on and advised us we turned onto [Taxiway] XA and the instructions were [Taxiways] XY-XZ. Tower then gave new instruction [Taxiways] XA-XB-XZ short [Runway] XXC. We complied with the new instructions and continued to the gate without further incident. Receiving a taxi clearance during the landing rollout is never ideal. I was able to read back the instructions; but didn't register they were different expecting the standard taxi in in ZZZ. Tower waiting till we exit the runway to give taxi clearances; instead of between 100-60 kts. A321 First Officer reported Tower gave them taxi instructions during landing roll which were read back but were not the expected instructions resulting in a taxiway incursion.